Effectiveness of the LUCAS device for mechanical chest compression after cardiac arrest: Systematic review of experimental, observational and animal studies

Heart

Volumn 98, Issue 12, 2012, Pages 908-913

  Gates, Simon ^a   Smith, Jessica L ^a   Ong, Giok J ^a   Brace, Samantha J ^a   Perkins, Gavin D ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WARWICK   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AORTA PRESSURE; BLOOD GAS; CAROTID ARTERY FLOW; CIRCULATION; COHORT ANALYSIS; COMPRESSION THERAPY; CORONARY ARTERY BLOOD FLOW; DEVICE THERAPY; END TIDAL CARBON DIOXIDE TENSION; EVIDENCE BASED PRACTICE; EXPERIMENTAL STUDY; HEART ARREST; HUMAN; INJURY; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; LIVER HEMATOMA; MANUAL VENTILATION; MECHANICAL CHEST COMPRESSION; META ANALYSIS; NONHUMAN; OBSERVATIONAL STUDY; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; OXYGEN SATURATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RESUSCITATION; REVIEW; RIB FRACTURE; SPLEEN HEMATOMA; STERNUM FRACTURE; SURVIVAL; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW;

ANIMALS; DISEASE MODELS, ANIMAL; EQUIPMENT DESIGN; HEART ARREST; HEART MASSAGE; HUMANS; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; THORAX;

EID: 84862830209     PISSN: 13556037     EISSN: 1468201X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/heartjnl-2011-301571     Document Type: Review

References (33)

1. Kramer-Johansen J, Myklebust H, Wik L, et al. Quality of out-of-hospital cardiopulmonary resuscitation with real time automated feedback: a prospective interventional study. Resuscitation 2006;71:283-92. (Pubitemid 44803181)
2. Edelson DP, Abella BS, Kramer-Johansen J, et al. Effects of compression depth and preshock pauses predict defibrillation failure during cardiac arrest. Resuscitation 2006;71:137-45. (Pubitemid 44602316)
3. Abella BS, Sandbo N, Vassilatos P, et al. Chest compression rates during cardiopulmonary resuscitation are suboptimal: a prospective study during in-hospital cardiac arrest. Circulation 2005;111:428-34. (Pubitemid 40204426)
4. Zuercher M, Hilwig RW, Ranger-Moore J, et al. Leaning during chest compressions impairs cardiac output and left ventricular myocardial blood flow in piglet cardiac arrest. Crit Care Med 2010;38:1141-416.
5. Christenson J, Andrusiek D, Everson-Stewart S, et al. Chest compression fraction determines survival in patients with out-of-hospital ventricular fibrillation. Circulation 2009;120:1241-7.
6. Perkins GD, Lockey AS. Defibrillation-safety versus efficacy. Resuscitation 2008;79:1-3.
7. Aufderheide TP, Lurie KG. Death by hyperventilation: a common and lifethreatening problem during cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Crit Care Med 2004;32(Suppl 9): S345-51.
8. Leary M, Abella BS. The challenge of CPR quality: improvement in the real world. Resuscitation 2008;77:1-3. (Pubitemid 351312842)
9. Arshid M, Lo TY, Reynolds F. Quality of cardio-pulmonary resuscitation (CPR) during paediatric resuscitation training: time to stop the blind leading the blind. Resuscitation 2009;80:558-60.
10. Steen S, Liao Q, Pierre L, et al. Evaluation of LUCAS, a new device for automatic mechanical compression and active decompression resuscitation. Resuscitation 2002;55:285-99. (Pubitemid 35379785)
11. Brooks SC, Bigham BL, Morrison LJ. Mechanical versus manual chest compressions for cardiac arrest. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2011;(1):CD007260.
12. Lim SH, Shuster M, Deakin CD, et al. CPR techniques and devices: 2010 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science with treatment recommendations. Resuscitation 2010;81(Suppl 1):e86-92.
13. Morley PT, Atkins DL, Billi JE, et al. Part 3: Evidence evaluation process: 2010 International Consensus on Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation and Emergency Cardiovascular Care Science with treatment recommendations. Resuscitation 2010;81(Suppl 1):e32-40.
14. Olsson P, Steen S, Kongstad P. The outcome of cardiac arrest the years before and after introduction of LUCAS in the ambulances (abstract no AS-023). Resuscitation 2008;77S:S9.
15. Olson H, Rundgren M, Silverstolpe J, et al. Out-of-hospital cardiac arrest e a panorama in transformation (abstract no AP-027). Resuscitation 2008;77S:S47.
16. Menzies D, Barton D, Darcy C, et al. Does the LUCAS device increase trauma during CPR? (abstract no AS-034). Resuscitation 2008;77S:S13.
17. Menzies D, Barton D, Nolan N. Does the LUCAS device result in increased injury during CPR? (abstract no S076). Resuscitation 2010;81S:S20.
18. Englund E, Silfverstolpe J, Halvarsson BL. Injuries after cardipulmonary resuscitation: a comparison between LUCAS mechanical CPR and standard CPR (abstract no AS-036). Resuscitation 2008;77S:S13.
19. Smekal D, Johansson J, Huzevka T, et al. No difference in autopsy detected injuries in cardiac arrest patients treated with manual chest compressions compared with mechanical compressions with the LUCAS deviceda pilot study. Resuscitation 2009;80:1104-7.
20. Axelsson C, Nestin J, Svensson L, et al. Clinical consequences of the introduction of mechanical chest compression in the EMS system for treatment of out-of-hospital cardiac arrestda pilot study. Resuscitation 2006;71:47-55.
21. de Wilde R, van der Weijden P, de Haan J, et al. ROSC at hospital admissionin out of hospital cardiac arrest using LUCAS (abstract no AP-034). Resuscitation 2008;77S:S49.
22. Maule Y. Mechanical external chest compression: a new adjuvant technology in cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Urgences & Accueil 2007;7:4-7.
23. Smekal D, Johansson J, Huzevka T, et al. A pilot study of mechanical chest compressions with the LUCAS® device in cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Resuscitation 2011;82:702-6.
24. Liao Q, Sjöberg T, Paskevicius A, et al. Manual versus mechanical cardiopulmonary resuscitation. An experimental study in pigs. BMC Cardiovasc Disord 2010;10:53.
25. Rubertsson S, Karlsten R. Increased cortical cerebral blood flow with LUCAS; a new device for mechanical chest compressions compared to standard external compressions during experimental cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Resuscitation 2005;65:357-63. (Pubitemid 40779346)
26. Olasveengen TM, Wik L, Steen PA. Quality of cardiopulmonary resuscitation before and during transport in out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. Resuscitation 2008;76:185-90.
27. Truhlar A, Hejna P, Zabka L, et al. Injuries caused by the autopulse and LUCAS II resuscitation systems compared to manual chest compressions (abstract no AP110). Resuscitation 2010;81S:S62.
28. Axelsson C, Karlsson T, Axelsson AB, et al. Mechanical active compressionedecompression cardiopulmonary resuscitation (ACDeCPR) versus manual CPR according to pressure of end-tidal carbon dioxide (PETCO2) during CPR in out-of hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA). Resuscitation 2009;80:1099-103.
29. Xanthos T, Pantazopoulos I, Roumelioti H, et al. A comparison of autopsy detected injuries in a porcine model of cardiac arrest treated with either manual or mechanical chest compressions. Eur J Emerg Med 2011;18:108-10.
30. Dwan K, Altman D, Arnaiz JA, et al. Systematic review of the empirical evidence of study publication bias and outcome reporting bias. PLoS One 2008;3:e3081.
31. Perkins GD, Brace S, Gates S. Mechanical chest-compression devices: current and future roles. Curr Opin Crit Care 2010;16:203-10.
32. Perkins GD, Woollard M, Cooke MW, et al. Prehospital randomised assessment of a mechanical compression device in cardiac arrest (PaRAMeDIC) trial protocol. Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med 2010;18:58.
33. Chalmers I, Glasziou P. Avoidable waste in the production and reporting of research evidence. Lancet 2009;374:86-9.